I wasn't totally sure where to post this, but figured the fantasy booking forum was a good enough place, since it's basically a fantasy
booking scenario.

Anyhow, I find it kind of interesting how the Undertaker has quietly faded away after WrestleMania XXVII. Triple H mentioned him the night after the
PPV on RAW, but otherwise, there's been pretty much no talk about Taker (or any kind of "Where is the Undertaker?" speculation) at all on WWE
TV. But it seems like the WWE would want him at next year's Mania to go 20-0 and it also seems like you'd want him to be a part of
WrestleMania XXX (no, it's not a porno, you pervs!) in 2014 if he's able.

So my question is, do you think the WWE could get away with booking the Undertaker only once a year for Mania, as kind of a special attraction? For
instance, say Miz comes out next March and talks about how Taker has been gone for almost a year, but he knows he's still out there and wants to
challenge him at WrestleMania. After a few weeks of "will Taker come back or not?" teases, he finally comes back a couple of weeks before the
PPV.

Taker goes on to (obviously) beat Miz and then disappears for another year. Only for some young upstart to come out in 2013 and demand the Undertaker
come back to face him. From a kayfabe/gay spooky perspective, it would kind of be like conjuring up the old demon one more time for another go-round
each year.

Of course, the one big negative to doing this every year would be that it would kind of lack build-up from a storyline perspective (which we already
saw to a somewhat lesser degree with Triple H this year). But on the flipside, it's a way for the WWE to keep using the streak for the next few
years, while letting the Undertaker basically be retired. It also would allow the streak to continue to be a selling point for the show, but without
the danger of it overshadowing the show as it has the last few years.

So good idea? Horrible idea? I'm not even sure how I really feel about it, but I just thought it would be kind of an interesting way to keep
Taker a part of WrestleMania for the next few years while only requiring about a month's work out of him.

Nash is only a few inches bigger than JBL and depending on how stiff he gets Punk should be able to take it. -JB King, meant in a totally non-sexual
way

Matte

"Family Man"

Posts 11518
Registered 12-16-2008Member Is Offline

Mood: Tight

posted on 8-3-2011 at 03:58 AM

Kind of like what they did with Taker/Kane leading to WMXX. They showed vignettes and had Kane "being haunted" or something by Taker's gay
spooky magical wrestling arena powers, though I don't know how long he was out before Mania that year.

I think they could use him in that capacity, yes. 20-0 is a huge deal in kayfabe, so it'll be nice to see that happen. The guy really has
nothing left to prove, so all that's left is completing his legacy by hitting that achievement. Why work throughout the year, tiring himself out
and risking injury, when he'll get the same reaction from the Mania crowd after being gone for a year that he'd get if he had worked every
PPV up to Mania (he'd probably get a bigger reaction after being gone so long, actually, as the crowd would be witnessing him coming out of
hibernation).

The following Mania is much more questionable. Will he even wrestle? If he does, will he go 21-0 or will he end his career after being beaten, at
20-1? If he wrestles at that Mania, it'll be the only Mania in a long time where his opponent actually has a chance of beating him, since
it'll likely be his last match and his opponent could use the rub. Obviously, whether The Streak should be broken is arguable, and has been
argued over for years.

quote:Originally posted by the goon
So my question is, do you think the WWE could get away with booking the Undertaker only once a year for Mania, as kind of a special attraction?

Yes. Not only could they get away with it, but I think it's probably in the best interests of both parties, especially if they do decide to keep
him active for WM30. It should be a foregone conclusion that nobody is breaking the streak; the best we can hope for now is that any opponent gets a
really solid match out of him to legitimize them (Miz, Sheamus, Barrett, Bryan, or even Cody would all come out of a really competitive showing at
Mania against Taker, even in a loss, just so long as the match is decent) or to add another highlight/talking point to an already established guy
(Cena, Rey, maybe even Christian). Taker's a big enough name that he'll always be an attraction, even new fans who have never seen him are
going to know he's a big deal and only getting to see him once a year will add to the mystique to people who haven't been exposed to him
for as long as older fans. Plus, the odds of Taker continuing his recent streak of show stealing Mania matches is a lot more likely to continue if he
gets 10 months or so off the road every year to heal up. It feels weird to compare Taker to Hogan but if you don't look at mainstream crossover
success but only legacy/lasting impact in wrestling, than yeah, I think Taker is kind of on the same level: he could disappear for a decade, and the
second he showed back up at a wrestling show he's going to get the crowd to blow the roof off.

Monday Night Flaw, a podcast about professional wrestling starring OO's own
Figure Foreskin as Andy the Smarmy Host and Chris Is Good517 as Cousin Balki.

The fact that its Undertaker and he has that kind of quasi supernatural aspect to his character also helps get the absences over, or at least make
them less glaring (let's face it, a sizeable portion of the net is going to bitch no matter what they do). John Cena is a wrestler, its
his day job. Taker...? He's sometimes an undertaker, other times some kind of superhuman zombie lovechild who worships the dark arts in his
basement. He's also 46 year old Mark Calaway who's a bit broken down but also arguably the only guy on the equal mainstream footing as
Hogan.

I think the fact that Taker kind of occupies that nexus of so many things affords him a lot more leeway than most other wrestlers who would deign to
show up once a year. If HHH had've disappeared for the year only to return at next years WM I'd shit on him for just collecting a cheque.
For both chracter reasons and real life reasons (without even touching on the streak) it just somehow works for the Undertaker.

C.MontgomeryPunk

Man of a Thousand Holds

Posts 1795
Registered 1-6-2010Member Is Offline

Mood: ButtViper-y

posted on 8-8-2011 at 03:19 AM

I hate it. It puts over nobody except The Undertaker and takes away a match likely from two guys who busted their ass all year like Sheamus vs Bryan
was cut from this years Mania.

quote:Originally posted by C.MontgomeryPunk
I hate it. It puts over nobody except The Undertaker and takes away a match likely from two guys who busted their ass all year like Sheamus vs Bryan
was cut from this years Mania.

I'm in this boat, too. I'm fine with sporadic appearances from Taker, which would likely include a WM showing - but not a once-per-year
deal that takes away from the guys (or girls, for that matter) that deserve the spotlight and payday. Besides, does anyone really buy WM just to see
Taker these days?

#GLENNSURVIVESLOL - Cherokee Jack, from TWD Season 6 thread

mastermind

Man of a Thousand Holds

Posts 1154
Registered 3-7-2002Location Brockton MAMember Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

posted on 8-8-2011 at 05:58 PM

Rewatch the Hulk Hogan/Muhammed Hassan skit from Wrestlemania 21 for how the Taker's "streak" should be continued in the future.

joerizal

Showstopper

Posts 786
Registered 2-7-2005Member Is Offline

Mood: carnivorey

posted on 8-23-2011 at 11:43 AM

quote:Originally posted by Matte
The following Mania is much more questionable. Will he even wrestle? If he does, will he go 21-0 or will he end his career after being beaten, at
20-1? If he wrestles at that Mania, it'll be the only Mania in a long time where his opponent actually has a chance of beating him, since
it'll likely be his last match and his opponent could use the rub. Obviously, whether The Streak should be broken is arguable, and has been
argued over for years.

Before, I thought that The Streak should never be broken.

But as I was watching Taker/HBK at WM25 and being so caught up in that match, I remember thinking, "I don't care who wins anymore. This match
is fucking phenomenal. If HBK breaks The Streak, he deserves it for this masterful wrestling showcase he and Taker are putting on".

And with that, my ideal scenario would be for Taker to retire 20-1, with the one loss coming in his final match at WM30, "giving the rub" and
possibly even "passing the torch" to the wrestler that dealt Taker that 1L.

And for the love of everything that is right about pro wrestling, please, don't let it be John fucking Cena.

my av is a burger.

Katie Vick killer

The Rowdy One

Posts 2257
Registered 8-25-2003Location w/ RandallMember Is Offline

Mood: Chin locked

posted on 9-1-2011 at 02:39 PM

I agree with mastermind and the Hulk Hogan/Muhammed Hassan skit from Wrestlemania 21.

I would happily keep Taker off TV from now until WM30. Just forget about him. Then at WM30 have seem upstart (with no match on the card) come out and
bitch and moan that he was left off the card. He then says that's not good enough and throws an open challenge. Lights go off and the gong hits.

Since WrestleMania XXX is right around the corner, I just wanted to pull this thread up from the depths (I posted it over two years ago), since the
"Undertaker wrestles only one time a year" idea has long since come to fruition. Kind of interesting that some of us liked the idea and some of us
hated it at the time, as Taker coming back each year at WrestleMania now seems to be pretty universally accepted by most of us.

I guess now the question is when will Taker's last match occur and if the WWE will promote it in advance or not.

Nash is only a few inches bigger than JBL and depending on how stiff he gets Punk should be able to take it. -JB King, meant in a totally non-sexual
way

First 9

The Great One

Posts 3955
Registered 1-22-2013Member Is Offline

Mood: Doing the Emma Dance

posted on 2-12-2014 at 04:50 AM

It seems so out of place using Miz as a theoretical opponent for Taker. The poor guy has taken such a big fall.

Taker's last match whenever that is will be told in advance. WWE wouldn't miss the chance to promote the shit out of it.

quote:Originally posted by First 9
It seems so out of place using Miz as a theoretical opponent for Taker. The poor guy has taken such a big fall.

Ha, it is kind of funny to think that when I made my original post in this thread, Miz was only four months removed from successfully defending the
WWE title against Cena in the main event of WrestleMania XXVII. Now he'd be lucky to even make it onto a WrestleMania card before he retires.

Nash is only a few inches bigger than JBL and depending on how stiff he gets Punk should be able to take it. -JB King, meant in a totally non-sexual
way